A FORMER Midland vicar who claims he was forced out of his parish told the Archdeacon that he was given ‘a poisoned chalice’ when he took up his post, an employment tribunal heard.

Reverend Mark Sharpe has alleged that he had no choice but to leave his congregation in Hanley Broadheath, Worcestershire, after parishioners subjected him and his family to a four-year-reign of intimidation and terror.

In a meeting with the Archdeacon of Dudley, Fred Trethewey, in January 2005, shortly after he took up his post, the hearing was told that Rev Sharpe said: “Thanks very much, you have given me a poisoned chalice.”

Rev Sharpe, 44, went off sick and later resigned, alleging he was unable to get help from the Worcester Diocese.

This week he began a claim for constructive dismissal. But lawyers for the Diocese point to ecclesiastical laws which state clergy are not employees.

They say office holders are ‘employed by God’ and therefore not eligible to take a case against the church.

An employment tribunal in Birmingham is being asked to rule whether Rev Sharpe can bring his case as an employee.

During a pre trial hearing John Benson QC, acting for the claimant, questioned the Archdeacon, who was appointed in 2001, about a meeting to discuss ongoing problems within the parish.

Mr Benson said: “You said to Mr Sharpe, ‘you are going to have to sort this lot out’ and the Archdeacon responded: “I don’t recall whether I used those words or not.”

Mr Benson then said: “Mr Sharpe asked you how long this had been going on for and you said ‘ever since I have been in post’.

“He said why was this not dealt with?” to which the Archdeacon replied: “I don’t recall that.”

Mr Benson then went on to say. “Mr Sharpe said ‘thanks very much, you have given me a poisoned chalice.’ To which the Archdeacon responded: “I don’t think it was my view that it was a poisoned chalice, I don’t recall whether that phrase was used, I know it’s been referred to as that since.”

Mr Trethewey, said he was aware of the “difficulties” but said he had no authority to “require Mr Sharpe to undertake a course of action but to advise him”.

If Rev Sharpe is allowed to take his case further, it would have huge legal implications for the Church of England.